Using Model - Pre WWI

About Uncle Sam

James Montgomery Flagg (my Grandfather) created the original Uncle Sam "I Want You". Although most researches will refer to JMF as the model of his original Uncle Sam, nothing could be farther from the truth. My Mother tried her adult life to correct this error, and I will carry on this monumental task.

In 1916, JMF reluctantly accepted a 4th of July project by Leslie Magazine, and eventually found his Uncle Sam one rainy night on a train bound for Parris Island, where he was to unveil a portrait of the Commandant.

His "symbol of our country" was a young, roughly 17 year old, Marine, which he considered the finest branch of our armed forces. He was able to acquire a 24 hour pass for this "boot" not normally allowed off base, and he aged his model's adolescent face by forty years and turned a circus clown's costume into symbolic dignity (as told to me and written by his daughter, my mother, Faith).

This cover was eventually made into a recruiting poster, at the request of the State Dept, and is now recognized as the most famous war poster of our time.

By WWII, JMF had ironically begun to look remarkably like his original Uncle Sam, and he did indeed use his mirror image in several new posters. When FDR is quoted as saying "saving model hire" in a personal letter to JMF, he is referring to the 2nd World War posters.

Faith would say, "I thought you might find the facts more fun than the fantasies."

QuickBooks Affiliate

Home Audio/Theatre

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Like an old shoe with holes in its soul [intended], Obama and his ilk have worn out the "Blame Bush" excuse. However, that will not prevent him from using it again and again to preserve his ego. But, as Vice President Cheney said, Obama is “trying to pretend we are not at war” with terrorists, and that “[W]e are at war and when President Obama pretends we aren’t, it makes us less safe”. This blame stuff is getting serious when it comes to the security of our country.

Now Obama and his staff are seriously taking time to investigate whether Bush had similar security breakdowns, so Bush will look worse than man-child Obama. In Obama's eleven months, eleven days, five hours and 52 minutes, has this man ever looked presidential? He's still campaigning, still pontificating, still lying, still campaigning, still golfing, still tele-prompting before the camera, still campaigning, still Bush bashing, and still apoligizing for America.

Rather than taking steps to secure our safety, Obama is more interested in one-upping, making nice with our enemies, collecting self-promoting awards, selling un-wanted government run health care, and promoting his image with staged interviews and a slobbering news media.

The Washington Prowler write an excellent piece about this self promoting man in American Spectator:

The Politics of Incompetenceby The Prowler, December 31, 2009

On December 26, two days after Nigerian Omar Abdulmutallab allegedly attempted to use underwear packed with plastic explosives to blow up the Amsterdam-to-Detroit flight he was on, and as it became clear internally that the Administration had suffered perhaps its most embarrassing failure in the area of national security, senior Obama White House aides, including chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod and new White House counsel Robert Bauer, ordered staff to begin researching similar breakdowns -- if any -- from the Bush Administration.

"The idea was that we'd show that the Bush Administration had had far worse missteps than we ever could," says a staffer in the counsel's office. "We were told that classified material involving anything related to al Qaeda operating in Yemen or Nigeria was fair game and that we'd declassify it if necessary."

The White House, according to the source, is in full defensive spin mode. Other administration sources also say a flurry of memos were generated on December 26th, 27th, and 28th, which developed talking points about how Obama's decision to effectively shut down the Homeland Security Council (it was merged earlier this year into the National Security Council, run by National Security Adviser James Jones) had nothing to do with what Obama called a "catastrophic" failure on Christmas Day.

"This White House doesn't view the Northwest [Airlines] failure as one of national security, it's a political issue," says the White House source. "That's why Axelrod and Emanuel are driving the issue."

Axelrod, who has no foreign policy or national security experience beyond occasionally consulting with liberal or progressive candidates running for political office in foreign countries, has been actively participating in national security briefings from the beginning of the administration. He has also sat in on Obama's "war council" meetings, providing Obama with suggestions in both venues based on what he knows about polling and public opinion data, say several White House sources.

"[Axelrod] isn't sitting in the meetings telling the President, 'Do this because the polling shows that,'" says one source. "But we know that in less public settings, or on paper, David does provide guidance to the President that gives him added context to the recommendations and information our foreign policy and national security teams give him."

Axelrod's presence in the meetings has raised some eyebrows, as previous political advisers in the White House have typically not participated in such meetings. Bush Administration sources, for example, say that political adviser Karl Rove was not present at national security meetings.

Public opinion does not seem to rank very high these days in the minds of our elected officials -- that is until re-election time. Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska may rue the day he pimped himself out for a critical vote that passed the ram-down-government-run health care in the Senate.

The new Rasmussen Poll has numbers tanking for Nelson, and lucky for him [not us], his re-election won't be until 2012:

If Governor Dave Heineman challenges Nelson for the Senate job, a new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows the Republican would get 61% of the vote while Nelson would get just 30%. Nelson was reelected to a second Senate term in 2006 with 64% of the vote.

Nelson's health care vote is clearly dragging his numbers down. Just 17% of Nebraska voters approve of the deal their senator made on Medicaid in exchange for his vote in support of the plan. Overall, 64% oppose the health care legislation, including 53% who are Strongly Opposed. In Nebraska, opposition is even stronger than it is nationally.

Fifty-six percent (56%) of voters in the state believe that passage of the legislation will hurt the quality of care, and 62% say it will raise costs.

You hear over and over that this is the way the sausage is made -- that this is just politics as usual. No .... it's not. This time the legislation is monumental, affects all of us, and takes over one-sixth of our economy.

What are we running here -- the Shady Lady Ranch? Michelle Malkin calls it "Cash for Cloture". From Mary Landrieu's Louisiana Purchase, Chris Dodd's $100 million hospital for Connecticut, the PA-NY-FLA promised protection for their Medicare Advantage programs while the other states lose theirs, Liebermen's "the Public Option is out" Lie, Bernie Sanders of Vermont multi BILLION dollar deal, Ben Nelson's Cornhusker Kickback, with pimp Harry Reid at the helm, we are looking a Articles of Impeachment time, which would include forcing Americans to purchase something they do not want.

Anybody interested?

The Heritage Foundation writes more on the Cornhusker Kickback:

Cornhusker Kickbacks for AllDecember 31, 2009

Last night the Nebraska Cornhuskers routed the Arizona Wildcats 33-0 in the Holiday Bowl. Most years college football bowl games do not have much to do with health care legislation in Washington. But last night, Husker fans throughout Nebraska were subjected to a 30-second television ad from Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE).

Politicians usually don’t run ads a month after November, and almost never more than two years before they are up for re-election. But after a new poll showed Nelson with a 55% unfavorable rating and down 30 points to a would-be 2012 challenger, Nelson decided to take to the air. The source of Nebraskans displeasure with Nelson is no secret. 64% of the state opposes the health care legislation Nelson recently voted for in the Senate, and only 17% approve of the special deal Nelson made for Nebraska’s Medicaid program, more commonly known as the Cornhusker Kickback, in order to secure his vote.

Nebraskans are not the only Americans disgusted by the tactics President Barack Obama and his allies are employing to pass their version of health reform. The attorneys general of 13 states have sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) demanding that the Nebraska deal be removed from the bill or they will challenge the legislation constitutionally in court.

Other states are taking a different tack, demanding that the entire Medicaid portion of the Senate bill be redone. The governors of the nation’s two largest Democratic states, New York and California, warn that the Medicaid expansion at the heart of the bill “could collapse the very safety net system it seeks to expand.” New York Governor David Patterson says the bill would leave his state $1 billion in the lurch and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger says Obamacare will drain California’s General Fund an additional $3 billion to $4 billion annually.

The fight over the Medicaid portions of the bill expose one of the dirty little secrets of Obamacare: for all the talk of fundamental reform of the system, over half of the health insurance coverage additions in both the House and Senate bills come from the expansion of Medicaid.

Medicaid was chosen to do the bulk of the health insurance expansion under Obamacare because it is cheap. But as Americans instinctively know: cheaper does not mean better. The President’s own Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services have warned that the lower Medicaid reimbursements will mean those who gain insurance under Obamacare through Medicaid will have a very difficult time finding doctors to treat them.

There is a reason government-run single payer health care advocates rally under the slogan “Medicare for All.” Medicare is actually popular among those who use it. But Americans who think they are gaining real health insurance under Obamacare are going to be in for a rude awakening when they discover they ended up with “Medicaid for All” instead.

QUICK HITS

Rush Limbaugh was admitted to a Honolulu hospital today and is resting comfortably after suffering chest pains. Rush will keep his fans updated at RushLimbaugh.com.

Tuesday, December 29, 2009

In another ominous move towards a One World Order, Obama has just placed our Constitutional rights under international law by amending President Reagan's Executive Order No. 12425. While we are all worrying about our health care [and rightly so], in dark of night Obama is chipping away at our freedoms.

These secret, nicely hidden assaults on our Constitution are disturbing, at a time when we have seen numerous militant jihadist attacks on Americans. Terrorist attacks have escalated in recent months, and Obama's denial to accept them for what they are is another indication being 'presidential' is above his pay grade.

Voicing our concerns on these constitutional matters to our Republican representatives is one way to keep the pressure on about stopping these assaults and to let them know we are watching -- like never before.

The Obama Administration Gives INTERPOL More Favorable Immunities Than American Law Enforcement Agenciesby Erick Erickson, December 29, 2009

Okay, okay. I know a lot of you know about this already.

For about a week I have been getting emails about Barack Obama surrendering American sovereignty to Interpol, the international criminal police force under the UN’s jurisdiction, but I honestly couldn’t believe even Obama would do that.

The people emailing me were, frankly, mostly of the black helicopter crowd variety so I dismissed it is as overhyped.

American law enforcement agencies at the local, state, and federal level are bound by open records act laws. At the federal level, the Freedom of Information Act applies.

Knowing that an intrepid reporter can, after establishing credible sources, file a judicially enforcible FOIA request to obtain information from a law enforcement agency is one of the chief deterrents to law enforcement agencies from abusing discretionary power.

Additionally, Interpol is a foreign power, but operates out of the U.S. Department of Justice inside the United States. While Interpol has some limited immunities given by Ronald Reagan in the early 1980’s, it does not — or at least did not until last week — have immunity from the 4th Amendment. Consequently, this international agency could, should it abuse its powers, have the federal government seize its assets, etc.

In other words, the international police organization Interpol was treated like every other law enforcement agency in America — it was subject to FOIA requests and could, like any arm of a municipal, county, state, or federal government agency, have its property taken by the federal government if it crossed the boundaries of criminal law protection for the accused.

For no discernible reason whatsoever, last Wednesday when no one was looking, Barack Obama signed an executive order giving all immunities of foreign powers to Interpol.

In other words, Interpol is now in a better position than any American law enforcement institution that operates on American soil. It cannot have its records searched or seized and it is not subject to the restraints of sunshine and transparency that FOIA requests can bring.

At a time when Obama is worried about ensuring the rights of terrorists against the abuses of the American government, he has no problem surrendering American rights to an arm of the United Nations.
This is extremely important because it comports with Barack Obama’s world view in ways harmful to American sovereignty. Obama has said repeatedly that he views no nation as greater than any other nation. He has said repeatedly that one nation should not be able to impose its will on another. He applies this even to the United States.

In Barack Obama’s world, the United States is no better and no worse than Iran, China, North Korea, or Kenya. In his world view, we are all players on an international stage with the United Nations as the leader.

Therefore, while Obama will not give up American sovereignty to Peru, he is perfectly happy to give up sovereignty to the United Nations.

The man is not just an amateur. He is also a damnably naive fool.

This is also a backdoor to the International Criminal Court (”ICC”). The United States chose, before Obama took office, to avoid the ICC. Interpol has become the law enforcement arm of the ICC. By taking away the limits to Interpol’s immunity in the United States, Barack Obama has freed the organization up to conduct criminal investigations of individuals inside the United States on behalf of the ICC without any of us knowing about it.

And who does the ICC want to investigate? The lawyers, CIA operatives, and soldiers who have defended the United States in the War on Terror by setting up GTMO and prosecuting the war. These men and women now have yet another deterrent to keep them from being fully effective — the fear of an international criminal investigation that they don’t even know about.

How many Americans will get killed because of the policies Barack Obama is employing to undermine our safety and security in a dangerous world?

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Are we ignoring the inevitable? Have the evils of socialism taken over our government and are we powerless to stop it? We have managed to hold on to our freedom for 233 years, but Progressive Statists have been chipping around the edges for roughly 100 years, and the walls are wearing thin.

Obamism is bound and determined to even us all out with the powers of redistribution, even though each and every one of us is different by nature - equal, but not even. We are on the verge of being told our freedoms are being taken away because it's "For the People", if we haven't heard it already. Think Nancy Pelosi, think Reid, think Obama. Obama wants to use his powers to level the playing field, rather than presidential duties such as protect our individual rights and protect us from foreign threats.

If we know the enemy, the enemy can be defeated. Victor Davis Hanson writes an excellent exposé in Pajamas Media on the annointed one's mentality:

The Origins of ObamismWhere Did These Guys Come From?by Victor Davis Hanson, December 23, 2009

The Origins of Obamism

I do not think it will be easy to delay Obamism. It is not just that both houses of Congress are under liberal leadership with ample majorities, with a White House and captive media egging them on. The problem is that now the entire engine of the federal government is harnessed in the most unapologetic way to pushing through a far left agenda. There is no shame, no hesitancy in using the full powers of the state.

How does that work out? Without qualification (remember we are in a new age of transparency and ethical reform) votes are bought with hundred-million-dollar earmarks; the attorney general predicates judicial action on the political ramifications of indicting or not indicting; federal bureaucracies (watch the EPA if cap and trade stalls) are devoted to the new Caesar rather than the letter of the law.

Such a strange scenario we have found ourselves in — a clear majority of Americans is opposed to almost everything Obama has to offer; congressional representatives know they are acting against the will of the people, but know too that they are offered all sorts of borrowed money for their districts to compensate for their unpopular actions. And a charismatic commander in chief believes that he can charm even the angriest of critics, and that anything he promises (Iran’s deadlines, closing of Guantanamo, new transparency, no more lobbyists, etc) means zilch and can be contextualized by another “let me be perfectly clear” speech spiced with a couple of the usual “it would have been impossible for someone as unlikely as me to have become President just (fill in the blanks) years ago”.

No, I would not count Obama out. So what drives his agenda? What are its origins?

Here are the three most prominent catalysts.

Equality of Result

What Barack Obama advocates is as old as Plato’s Republic and Aristotle’s Politics, the agenda of the classical dêmos and Roman turba.

It is why the French Revolution emphasized égalité and fraternité, while the Founding Fathers instead championed the freedom of the individual from the despotism of the state. In short, equality of result doctrine ignores the role of markets, of skills, of tragedy itself that renders some of us ill, others in perfect health, some born gifted, others less so, some evil by nature, others good, and instead promises that the state can even us all out through its power of material redistribution. Give us all the same amount of money and perks at the end of the day, and then utopia reigns under the benevolent watch of Ivy-League professors and organizers.

It is a given that what we make is not our own, but predicated on the liberality of society. Thus, for those who were too greedy, too conniving, or even too lucky, the state must step in to ensure that we end up the same.

In its most benign form, we know this as progressivism or communitarianism, a big government, high tax philosophy that co-exists within democracy. Its more pernicious strains are socialist, in which the state ensures, through bureaucratic fiat and a labyrinth of laws that curb free expression, that redistribution is institutionalized. And the virulent form (thankfully with the fall of the Soviet Union and the transformation of China not so global-threatening any more) is, of course, a murderous communism, in which any means necessary are justified to ensure the desire ends and the rule of anointed apparat. Remember, history’s greatest killers (Stalin and Mao) do it all “for the people.”

Multiculturalism

But there is another element to Barack Obama besides progressive statism. A number of contemporary –isms and –ologies (multiculturalism, moral equivalence, utopian pacifism, post-modernism) also help to explain Obamism, especially in cultural terms. Our universities subscribe to race/class/gender theory of exploitation, in which much of the unhappiness of today’s women, of today’s nonwhite, and of today’s poor originates with the privileges of the white Christian Western male that are predicated on oppression.

It works like this: The ghetto resident, the denizen of the barrio, the abandoned and divorced waitress with three young children, can all chart their poverty and unhappiness not to accident, fate, bad luck, bad decisions, poor judgment, illegality or drug use, or simple tragedy, but rather exclusively to a system that is rigged to ensure oppression on the basis of race, class, and gender—often insidious and unfathomable except to the sensitive and gifted academic or community organizer.

So Obama combines the age-old belief that the state is there to level the playing field (rather than protect the rights of the individual and secure the safety of the people from foreign threats), with the postmodern notion that government must recompensate those by fiat on the basis on their race or class or gender. Remember all that, and everything from the Professor Gates incident, to the dutiful attendance at the foot of Rev. Wright to Van Jones become logical rather than aberrant. Michelle Obama could make $300,000 and she will always be more a victim than the Appalachian coal miner who earns $30,000, by virtue of her race and gender.

The Chicago Way

A third and final ingredient to Obamism is the Chicago way. Here we see an interesting updated version of the old big-city, Daley thuggery. Rahm Emanuel threatens recalcitrant congressmen with reminders of the long Obama memory. The Axelrod/Jarrett clique ensures that the government channels stimuli to blue-states, that key Congress people are bought off with tens of millions of government largess, that every campaign promise—from no lobbyists and airing on C-span health care debates to posting impending legislation on the Internet for set durations and “reaching across the aisle”—is simply cynical fluff that no sane person would take seriously.

So?

In short, we have a traditional statist bent on redistribution (Obama’s words, not mine), updated with the postmodern belief that race/class/gender oppressions require government affirmative reactions (which also abroad explains why we reach out to enemies and shun allies), all energized by an ends justify the means Chicago bare-knuckles apparat.

And?

These true believers, then, don’t really care that the Blue Dogs (if such really exist) bite the dust in 2010, if Harry Reid goes up in smoke, or indeed, if Barack Obama is reelected. Instead, they will institutionalize an agenda that will affect America for generations, move it sharply to the left, and earn a spot in the academic pantheon of American heroes.

Asking why would Obama & Co. be so self-destructive to push through an array of proposals that have no more than 45% of the public’s support is like asking whether the English Prof who teaches incomprehensible Foucauldian theory worries whether he has only 2 students, or whether the well-off union boss is all that upset that membership has sunk to 30% of the workforce, or multimillion-dollar-earning Sarah Palin-interviewing Katie Couric is worried about her sinking ratings, or whether the New York Times columnists are upset that their mother paper is broke with subscription and readership down, and laying off thousands of blue-collar employees.

Instead, for the true believer, it is all about the self, and the sense of the self—and damn all other considerations. (We saw that with Jimmy Carter as well; that he destroyed liberal Democrat politics for a generation meant nothing; that he won prizes and jet-setted the world for thirty years meant everything. For these people, it is always about them—all the time. Let us eat cake as they end up liberal icons for the duration).

What Are We Left With?

The most blatant cynicism in recent American political history—a man who ran as a bipartisan who is the most partisan we’ve seen, a healer whose even flippant comments are designed to offend, a statist who assumes that the sheared sheep cannot stampede somewhere else, a reformer who trusts his honey-laced rhetoric can disguise Daley style-corruption.

On that happy note.

Everything, as my dear late mother lectured me, happens for a reason, or at least presents a sort of logic—irony, paradox, karma, and nemesis being the best ways of interpreting our unfathomable existences. It took messianic narcissistic Barack Obama to expose the full extent of the mess that a once noble tradition of 19th-century liberalism had devolved into. Only he could have rammed it down the throats of the American people, and when he is done, we will suffer, but also sicken of it for quite a while.

Otherwise, Merry Christmas! And thanks again to the most informed, articulate, and outspoken commentators in the blogosphere!

Saturday, December 26, 2009

As we begin to welcome a new year, with new hope for the future, we also reflect on our lives -- how far we have come, how we survived the year gone by, how to prepare for the next, and the many things for which we are grateful.

When in doubt, lately I get strength in reflecting on our past, and the strength it took our Founding Fathers to fight on, in the darkest of times. What these men and women went through to get us where we are today, can only be imagined, and I thank God every day for their spirit and supreme sacrifice. They have given us a new nation, with new principles - a truly unique gift, a constitutional government. We cannot let them down.

The Heritage Foundation writes a beautiful Christmas piece:

Remembering the Providential Gift of AmericaDecember 25, 2009

Christmas, 1776.

Summer had begun with strong declarations of noble ideals, but by winter the cause of liberty seemed to be at low ebb. Having suffered defeat after defeat, many had all but given up hope. It looked like freedom would succumb yet again, as it had throughout history, to the forces of authoritarianism and tyranny.

Then, on Christmas Day, 1776, a small band of colonial forces under the command of Gen. George Washington, having retreated all the way from New York, again crossed the Delaware River and brought battle at Trenton, New Jersey. Washington not only won the battle but regained the initiative and turned the war in the patriots’ favor. One week later, Washington defeated the British at Princeton and forced the enemy to withdraw, preventing its advance on Philadelphia, seat of the Continental Congress.

When it announced itself to the world in 1776, the United States of America was little more than an alliance of 13 small colonies on a barren continent, thousands of miles from their ancestral homeland, surrounded by hostile powers.

Now, well over two centuries after winning independence from the British Empire, America is the freest, wealthiest, most powerful nation on Earth. Along the way it established sovereign nationhood, settled a continent and more and brought unprecedented prosperity to its citizens. It survived a devastating Civil War that threatened its very life, abolished slavery and raised up the emancipated to be citizens equal to their one-time masters. It triumphed in two world wars fought on foreign soil and a decades-long struggle against worldwide communism that, 20 years ago, led to the fall of the Berlin Wall and collapse of the Soviet Union.

What accounts for this monumental success?

The founding of the United States was indeed revolutionary. But not in the sense of replacing one set of rulers with another, or overthrowing the institutions of society. John Adams queried:

“What do we mean by the American Revolution? The revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people. . . . This radical change in the principles, opinions, sentiments, and affections of the people, was the real American Revolution.”

Our revolution was about the ideas upon which a new nation was to be established. Permanent truths “applicable to all men and all times,” as Abraham Lincoln later said, proclaimed that principle rather than will would be the ultimate ground of government.

What is truly revolutionary about America is that, for the first time in history, these universal ideas became the foundation of a system of government and its political culture. Because of these principles, rather than despite them, the American Revolution culminated not in tyranny but a constitutional government that has long endured.

To this day, 233 years after Washington and his men crossed the Delaware, these principles–proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence and promulgated by the Constitution–still define us as a nation and inspire us as a people. These principles are responsible for a prosperous, just nation unlike any other. They are the highest achievements of our tradition, a beacon to those who strive for freedom but also a warning to tyrants and despots everywhere. Because of these principles, not despite them, America achieved greatness.

The Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson later recorded, was “neither aiming at originality of principle or sentiment, nor yet copied from any particular and previous writing, [but] was intended to be an expression of the American mind.”

As Americans, our aim must be a clear expression and forthright defense of the nation’s principles in the public square so that they become, once again, an expression of the American mind. Despite constant scorn by academic elites, political leaders and the popular media, most Americans still believe in the uniqueness of this country and respect the Founders’ noble ideas. They may fail a test of particulars – quick: when did Washington cross the Delaware? – but they overwhelmingly want to know about this nation and its meaning.

We must give voice to all those who have not given up on their country’s experiment in self-government, have not concluded the cause of liberty and limited constitutional government is lost and have not accepted America’s decline as inevitable.

The goal must be to restore the liberating principles of the American Founding as the defining public philosophy of our nation. As it was for most of American history, so it can be again.

The joy of this wonderful season is about new beginnings and the eternal promise of redemption. We Americans have the immeasurable benefit, the providential gift, of having inherited a great country.

We must never forget its confidence, optimism and promise, its endless capacity for renewal, are contained in our dedication to the enduring principles of liberty with which all men are endowed by their Creator.

If you want to know why Obama told the world America is not a Judao-Christian country, you only need to look to his actions, which, after all, speak louder than words. He and his family have attended church three times in 2009, and did not attend church services on Christmas. They can give any excuse known to mankind... Hooey!

Remember, in one of his numerous interviews, Obama said: "My Muslim Faith". The press, again, have given him a free pass on this [severely irresponsible and criminally negligent in their job], and should President Bush have neglected Christmas service, we would have not heard the end of it. But when it comes to Obama, the press gush and fawn over this man to the point of revulsion.

Bloody Liar: No Church for Obamas on Christmasby Pamela Geller, December 25, 2009

A writer for TIME magazine reports that the president and his family are not attending Christmas services. Good luck with that, America!

But it is not surprising. Real church (not Jeremiah Wright's Klan meetings), but real church to Obama is like the silver cross to Dracula. He has gone to church (including a black liberation church) all of three times in 2009.

I warn you if you click on the Time magazine link, you will go into insulin chock from the sticky, sweet sugar coating of this disgusting story. Fellating the Obamas, Time magazine's Amy Smith laments that "church, in fact, has been a surprisingly tough issue for the Obamas." Awww, poe Moe. The media's constant proctological ass kissing is enough to make you puke.

But it was his his constant slinging and trafficking in his Christianity while campaigning that makes this particularly galling.

And this Amy Smith has no shame or journalistic ethics. She goes on to say:

"it looks like the First Family will still make it to Hawaii for Christmas...... The Obamas have celebrated Christmas in Hawaii, where the President grew up, nearly every year since the girls were born.

Obama grew up in the streets of Jakarta. His childhood was spent in Indonesia, ages six to twelve. Smith spins the mendacious narrative that the Obama propaganda machine carefully constructed and the media happily administered to the unsuspecting public in the run up to the election. If Obama's presidency is proof of anything, it's that Mahmoud Ahmadijihad could be elected POTUS if the media is in your crotch cup.

Who is taking odds on when he comes out?

No Churchgoing Christmas for the First Family

It looks like the First Family will still make it to Hawaii for Christmas. They've had a whirlwind holiday season so far, starting with the lighting of the National Christmas Tree, through hosting more than 50,000 people for 27 parties and open houses, and ending with a visit by the First Lady, Malia and Sasha, and the family's dog Bo, to deliver cookies to the Children's National Medical Center. The Obamas have also started their own holiday traditions in their new home, adding a Christmas wislamenhing tree to the decorations festooning the White House.

Church, in fact, has been a surprisingly tough issue for the Obamas. They resigned their membership with Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago in 2008 after Obama renounced the church's controversial former pastor, Jeremiah Wright. And while the First Family intended to find a local church to attend when they moved to Washington, concerns about crowds and displacing regular worshippers has prevented them from finding a new religious home during their first year here.

Elections have consequences, and never before have the far left radicals had this much control in our government. We are seeing it more and more every day, as they continue to overreach, ignoring the wishes of the people, eradicating hundreds of years of American congressional protocol, openly buying off votes, thumbing their noses at American tradition, and stealing elections.

America is going down a path not intended by our Founding Fathers, and up til now, not by the majority of its citizens. During his campaign, millions were bamboozled by Obama's charm, believed his lies, and truly wanted Hope & Change, but most did not want the consequences this election has brought. I pray it's not too late, but America will have to become engaged and stay that way, in order for us to keep the republic our Founding Fathers gave us -- with their lives.

Pajamas Media writes an excellent piece on this:

The Socialist Revolution Has Come to AmericaRemember those heady days of 2008 when Barack Obama successfully painted himself as a moderate?by Matt Patterson, December 21, 2009

The socialist revolution has come to America. It has been a long time coming.

On Christmas Day 1991, the Soviet flag flying over the Kremlin came down — the Cold War was over. In the United States, the political left, dismayed from the collapse of its great patron, retrenched and transmogrified with the times, choosing for their president a free-trading, welfare-reforming moderate.

But this was but a feint; the era of big government was not over. The left had not learned its lesson, had not abandoned its dreams of absolute control. It seethed and stewed … and waited.

The new century dawned in fire when the twin towers came down. America lashed out, sending large armies into Asia and Arabia. Like all wars, fortunes waxed and waned. But the iPod generation has not the capacity to endure the waning. By the time Mesopotamia was stabilizing, it was too late; the American public had abandoned the war it had once supported. The commander-in-chief who took America into battle with Congress and the people behind him left office ridiculed and reviled.

Many will tell you that it was the financial crisis that led to the election of Obama in 2008. It is certainly true that John McCain’s erratic response to that meltdown did nothing to enhance his chances. But the Republican goose was cooked long before Lehman by years of war, seemingly endless reports of our soldiers struggling valiantly to hold back chaos in faraway lands for reasons that were growing less clear by the day, and a Republican president who seemed frighteningly inarticulate and uncomprehending throughout. The public had simply had enough.

Into this breech stepped a charming, charismatic, seemingly moderate Democrat (he even promised tax cuts!). Barack Obama made everyone feel good — about him, about themselves, about themselves for supporting him. And America wanted, needed to feel good again; they had spilled too much blood, had too much of their own blood spilled, in the preceding eight years.

A Republican Party in tatters, a nation exhausted and desperate. Are there any other conditions under which the American people could have turned to a man like Barack Obama? For just under the smooth, smiling facade lurked a man of deep allegiance to the radical left, counting among his associates both an avowed terrorist and a raving, racialist preacher.

But Americans didn’t want to hear it and the media obliged them. The ideologue was soon ensconced in the White House, where he acted swiftly to upend the entirety of American society through a comprehensive, two-pronged assault:

1. The government moved to take greater control of medical care and thus one-sixth of our entire economy. The excuse? Some people don’t have insurance, don’t you know? What are the details? Good question: specifics hatched in back rooms behind closed doors, utterly incomprehensible bills that may as well be carved in hieroglyphics. What will it mean for you? Why, whatever they want it to mean, of course.

2. Efforts to criminalize a particular naturally occurring compound, CO2, picked up pace. Why have they so singled out this substance? Because it is a byproduct of work and, indeed, life itself — every time you turn on your heater, every time you drive to work, every time you sit down to eat: don’t you know these sinful behaviors must be curbed, because you are “poisoning the planet” with your every move?

Success in this double strategy would amount to nothing less than a socialist revolution. A revolution of legislative opacity and bureaucratic fiat, to be sure, but a revolution just the same, for there is literally no part of your existence they couldn’t justify controlling under the cover of “health care” and “emissions” reform. Resistance would be met at first with peaceable punishments, fines and such. But the history of such revolutions shows that, sooner or later, they enforce their dictates with bars and boots.

Think it can’t happen here? History is littered with the wreckage of free states that gave way, sometimes with a scream, often with a whimper, to autocracy and absolutism. The city that gave birth to the world’s first and greatest republic was also home to Caesar and Mussolini.

America is not immune to these forces. The tides of history are inexorable and sooner or later pull every edifice into the sea.

Matt Patterson is a National Review Institute Washington fellow and the author of "Union of Hearts: The Abraham Lincoln & Ann Rutledge Story". His email is mpatterson.column@gmail.com.

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

The one thing Obama hates more than anything is America's exceptionalism, and he's hell bent on destroying it. America has come a long long way from the frontier days when it took days for messaging, people's life span was half of what it is today, medical knowledge was minimal, and transportation was slow. We are exceptional, but what makes us different is that we share it, unconditionally, with the rest of the world.

From its beginning, America has always been a country of individualism and self-reliance. We fought hard for it. And, we are also a moral country, reaching out to countries in need, whether it be a natural disaster or a threat of invasion..... We are now on a precipice.

Dennis Prager writes a brilliant piece about America and its Last Best Hope of Earth on very shaky ground:

Democrats Ensure America Will No Longer Be the Last Best Hope of Earthby Dennis Prager, December 22, 2009

As the passage of the bill that will start the process of nationalizing health care in America becomes almost inevitable, so, too, the process of undoing America's standing as The Last Best Hope of Earth will have begun.

That description of America was not, as more than a few Americans on the left believe, made by some right-wing chauvinist. It was made by President Abraham Lincoln in an address to Congress on Dec. 1, 1862.

The bigger the American government becomes, the more like other countries America becomes. Even a Democrat has to acknowledge the simple logic: America cannot at the same time be the last best hope of earth and increasingly similar to more and more countries.

Either America is unique, in which case it at least has the possibility of uniquely embodying hopes for mankind -- or it is not unique, in which case it is by definition not capable of being the last best hope for humanity -- certainly no more so than, let us say, Sweden or the Netherlands.

Indeed, President Obama acknowledged this in April, when asked by a European reporter if he believes in American exceptionalism. The president's response: "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism."

The president was honest. In his view, as in the view of today's Democratic party, America is special only in the same way we parents regard our children as "special." We all say it and we all believe it, but we know that it is meaningless except as an emotional expression of our love for our children. If every child is equally special, none can be special, in fact. If every country is exceptional, then no country is exceptional, or at least no more so than any other.

With the largest expansion of the American government and state since the New Deal, the Democratic party -- alone -- is ending a key factor in America's uniqueness and greatness: individualism, which is made possible only when there is limited government.

The formula here is not rocket science: The more the government/state does, the less the individual does.

America's uniqueness and greatness has come from a number of sources, two of which are its moral and social value system, which is a unique combination of Enlightenment and Judeo-Christian values, and its emphasis on individual liberty and responsibility.

Just as the left has waged war on America's Judeo-Christian roots, it has waged war on individual liberty and responsibility.

Hillel, the most important rabbi of the Talmud (which, alongside the Hebrew Bible, is Judaism's most important book), summarized the human being's obligations in these famous words: "If I am not for myself, who will be for me? But if I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when?"

What does this mean in the present context? It means that before anything else, the human being must first take care of himself. When people who are capable of taking care of themselves start relying on the state to do so, they can easily become morally inferior beings. When people who could take care of their family start relying on the state to do so, they can easily become morally inferior. And when people who could help take care of fellow citizens start relying on the state to do so, the morally coarsening process continues.

There has always been something profoundly ennobling about American individualism and self-reliance. Nothing in life is as rewarding as leading a responsible life in which one has not to depend on others for sustenance. Little, if anything, in life is as rewarding as successfully taking care of oneself, one's family and one's community. That is why America has always had more voluntary associations than any other country.

But as the state and government have gotten bigger, voluntary associations have been dying. Why help others if the state will do it? Indeed, as in Scandinavia, the attitude gradually becomes: why even help myself when the state will do it?

Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are right about one thing -- they are indeed making history. But their legacy will not be what they think. They will be known as the people who led to the end of America as the last best hope of earth.

When all appears lost, perhaps we can take a lesson from our history. This has been a week where we have seen outrageous actions by Harry Reid and his minions. It was Reid who ignored 200 years of Senate precedents. It was Reid who locked out Republican Senators from discussion. It was Reid who determined that hundreds of years of accumulated Senate parliamentary rulings have no bearing on the health care vote. But, remember, it's not over til it's over.

The most egregious of all was Reid's amendment to this abominable legislation which states 'no repeal allowed'. This changes the rules of the United States Senate, and to do that you need a two-thirds vote (67). Does that matter to Reid? Apparently not.

Hogan has a very heart-warming piece in RedState about our magnificent history, and is so appropriate at this time of year -- so, take heart, Partriots, and have a wonderful Merry Christmas and a very Happy Hanukkah:

A Lesson From Christmas of 1776Posted by hogan, December 21, 2009

The first key vote came in last night. The Democrats got their 60. But there will be several more votes.

Yes, this Christmas, the American people face a tyrannical Congress and narcissistic President hell bent on forcing upon them - over their clear opposition - a healthcare bill that will reduce the quality of American healthcare, cost trillions of dollars, increase taxes, empower the national government to mandate what the American people must or mustn’t buy, and that will, among many other immoral things, provide federal funding for abortions.

But this is not the first Christmas Americans have faced daunting odds. The Christmas of 1776 should serve as inspiration for us:

In the winter of 1776, General George Washington and his ragged army had experienced only defeat and despair. The War for Independence was going badly, with failure following failure. In the preceding months, Washington’s campaign in New York had not gone well; the Battle of Long Island ended in a loss when the British troops managed to out-maneuver the Continental Army. A series of defeats settled around Washington as he was forced to retreat across New Jersey to Pennsylvania on December 7th and 8th.

As the harsh Pennsylvania winter set in, the morale of the American troops was at an all time low. The soldiers were forced to deal with a lack of both food and warm clothing, while Washington watched his army shrink due to desertions and expiring enlistments. Now, more than ever, a victory was desperately needed.

The original plan called for the three divisions to cross the river under the cover of darkness. The boats to be used for the crossing were gathered earlier in the month in compliance with General Washington’s orders, primarily as a defensive measure. Various types of boats were collected; most notable were the large, heavy Durham boats used to carry pig iron down the Delaware.

Fully expecting to be supported by two divisions south of Trenton, Washington assembled his own troops near McConkey’s Ferry in preparation for the crossing. By 6 PM. 2,400 troops had begun crossing the ice-choked river. The operation was slow and difficult due to the condition of the river. There was an abrupt change in the weather forcing the men to fight their way through sleet and a blinding snowstorm. These obstacles proved to be too much for the supporting divisions led by Generals Cadwalader and Ewing, ultimately preventing their crossing at southern points along the Delaware.

Against all odds, Washington and his men successfully completed the crossing and marched into Trenton on the morning of December 26, achieving a resounding victory over the Hessians.

By moving ahead with his bold and daring plan, General George Washington re-ignited the cause of freedom and gave new life to the American Revolution.

Perhaps you can take a moment away from football and the family to call a few Senators (not just your own)? Maybe organize a protest? Click Here for Senate contact information. Let Democrats - especially Senators like Nelson, Lincoln, Webb, Landrieu and other red state Senators - know you will fight them and donate to their opponent. Let Republicans know they should do everything they can to stop this bill or you will support their next primary opponent. There will be at least two more votes this week requiring 60 to prevail.

Monday, December 21, 2009

It's been a tough few days for those fighting to keep government out of our health care decisions and our lives. It's not over, and we can still make a difference. It's unfortunate Reid is pressing this in our face at Christmastime, but that's how his diabolical mind works.

In-between wrapping presents, we can get in a phone call or two. While the Christmas cookies are in the oven, we can get a few faxes over to them. The left is counting on a retreat, and I don't think we're ready for that - not by a long shot. Straighten that back, dig yourself in, get good and mad at the loss of your freedom, and send your faxes or phone here.

If they beat us in the Senate, we will fight them in conference. If they beat us in conference, we will fight them in the House. If they beat us in the House over healthcare, we will fight them over cap and trade. We will fight them over immigration and amnesty. We will fight them over the deficit. We will fight them over the debt. And we will fight them in 2010. We will fight them in the House. We will fight them for Senate seats in Connecticut, Delaware, Pennsylvania, New York, and Arkansas. We will fight them in Colorado and North Dakota and California and Washington State. We will fight them in Illinois and in New Jersey. We will never, never, never, never give up! Our country is at stake!

All our defeats do is to teach us the futility of appealing to moderate Democrats and the necessity - the dire necessity - of replacing them with committed Republicans. There is no such thing as a moderate Democrat in Congress. There are simply those whose votes the leadership does not need in order to promote its socialist agenda.

We will not place our faith in the Nelsons or the Lincolns or the Liebermans or the Landrieus of the Senate. Nor in the Blue Dogs of the House. All we do when we depend on them is to permit them to raise their price and up the ante for their vote. We will place our faith only in the Republicans who oppose them and who will bring the collective insanity which has gripped Washington to an end.

But we will continue to fight each battle in Congress because it is only by blunting Obama's momentum and by demonstrating to the voters of America how their Democratic members of Congress are only automatic votes for socialism that we have a chance to triumph in 2010. And triumph we will. We can only hope that there is still a country to take back!

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

We, as conservatives, are losing our bearing. Because of our belief to live and let live, conservatives are not 'in your face' people. We love people of all religion, color or creed, and above all we love God and our country, from which it was founded.

Times have changed, as we have witnessed this past 18 months. Our principles and rights have been ambushed, and it's time to stop this madness. We are a country that used to be able to worship together, without animosity. We used to be able to express ourselves without being trampled, much less sued, for our ideas.

After being told prayers are not allowed in our schools, we have 2nd Graders being taught "Allah is God", but don't say anything against this or you are an "Islamophobe". For the love of Heaven, do these people know how ridiculous they sound?

It's time for Conservatives to take a stand for justice and the American Way. The left has been chipping away at our God given rights for far too long.

Act! for America writes about the advance of radical Islam and CAIR:

Second Graders Told to Sing “Allah is God”December 16, 2009

What would happen if public school second graders were told to sing a Christmas song that proclaimed “Jesus is Lord?”

Or what would happen if those same students were told to sing “We pray ‘til night to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob?”

The fact is, we don’t have to speculate, because neither of those things is likely to happen in any public school in America.

So how is it that a public elementary school principal and some teachers saw nothing objectionable with their students singing “Allah is God?”

Their answer—they were just trying to teach “inclusiveness.” See the Fox News Radio story below (highlights added).

And when a Christian parent objected, a spokesman for the Muslim Alliance of Indiana called the objection “Islamophobic.”

So simply objecting to a song in a public school that proclaims “Allah is God,” when no other faiths are so recognized, is “Islamophobic?”

Wow.

We have reached the point where a non-Muslim parent is called an “Islamophobe” for simply and rightfully objecting to his child being forced to sing a song in public school that proclaims “Allah is God.”

Please don’t let anyone tell you we’re over-reacting to the threat of political correctness and the advance of radical Islam.

CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has been a national leader in the ongoing public relations campaign to tar critics of radical Islam as “Islamophobes.”

Have you signed our petition calling for a government investigation of CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations?

A battle over religion is brewing in central Indiana after a public school wanted second graders to sing a song declaring, “Allah is God.” The phrase was removed just before the performance after a national conservative group launched a protest.

The principal of Lantern Road Elementary School in Fishers, IN, said they were trying to teach inclusiveness through their holiday production. It included references to Christmas, Hanukkah, Ramadan, Las Posadas and Kwanzaa. However, no other deity, other than Allah, was referenced in the show.

“It went off…without a hitch,” Danielle Thompson told the Indianapolis Star. “Several families thought it was a nice program.”

But others did not – especially David Hogan. His daughter came home with a copy of the lyrics just days before the production. Hogan, a Christian, told the American Family Association, a conservative advocacy group, that he was deeply concerned to learn that his daughter had been singing, “Allah is God.”

Here’s what the children were assigned to sing:

“Allah is God, we recall at dawn,
Praying ‘til night during Ramadan
At this joyful time we pray happiness for you,
Allah be with you all your life through.”

But when it came time to perform the “Christian” part of Christmas, children were assigned to say:

“I didn’t know there was a little boy at the manger. What child is this?
I’m not sure if there was a little boy or not.
Then why did you paint one on your nativity window?
I just thought if there was a little boy, I’d like to know exactly what he (sic) say.”

Micah Clark, executive director of the Indiana AFA, launched an Internet protest once he heard about the allegations. “What surprised me here is that we’ve had a secular scrubbing of Christmas for so long and the school apparently didn’t see the problem with kids singing to Allah,” he told FOX News Radio. “You won’t even mention Jesus and you’re going to force my child to sing about Allah?”

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

It appears Sen. Lieberman has succumbed to the Obama/Reid pressure. What price does it take to sell out your country? You can use all the rationale in the world, but common sense tells you this bill will destroy our country.

Sen. McConnell stated that the Republicans are united against this government takeover, which means we need to only need ONE lone Democrat to stand against his/her fellow Libs. Is there a brave one amongst the bunch, with a backbone to do the right thing?

The Heritage Foundation gives us some pointers:

The Three Senators That Could Save You From Government Run Health CareDecember 15, 2009

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) may have announced that he expects to vote for Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) health bill this afternoon, but that leaves Reid with just 59 votes. He needs to get all three of the following holdouts to sign on the dotted line by Christmas:

Sen. James Webb (D-VA)
In the Winchester Star today, Webb announces that he is “still undecided” on how he will vote. Webb voted with conservatives five times for amendments that would have prevented Reid from stealing almost $500 billion from Medicare to pay for his massive new health insurance company bailout. Webb also describes himself as a “long-time supporter of Medicare Advantage programs which have, in my view, greatly improved services in rural areas of Virginia.”

Webb may want to pay particularly close attention to the latest report from the non-partisan and independent Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMMS), the agency in charge of running Medicare and Medicaid, which reads:

Lower benchmarks would reduce [Medicare Advantage] rebates to plans and thereby result in less generous benefit packages. We estimate that in 2015, when the competitive benchmarks would be fully phased in, enrollment in MA plan would by 33% (from a projected level of 13.7 million under current law to 9.2 million under the proposal).

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO)
McCaskill told the Associated Press this weekend: “The whole reason we’re doing this bill is to bring down cost, first for the American people in health care, and secondly for the deficit.” AP adds: “Asked if she would vote against the bill if it raised health care costs overall, she said, ‘Absolutely.’”

Sunday, December 13, 2009

Today Rasumssen is reporting Obama at an all new record low with his approval index number tanking at minus 19. Gateway Pundit wrote that "Obama has dropped a stunning 49 points in less than one year."

One has to remember the now infamous quote of Rahm Emanuel, Chief of Staff and Mouthpiece to the Press, that "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before."

And that is exactly what has happened since this man took office. Every single day there has been one atrocity after another, and America has not been able to catch its breath since January 20th. But, on the bright side, because of their lightning speed, all of these atrocities have added up, and [in their usual fashion] they have overreached to the point where Americans are repelling.

Victor Davis Hanson gives us a laundry list of why in Pajamas Media, and the only item I would add to the NYC 'Date-Night" would be the dastardly New York City 'Fly-By'. Couple that with the terrorist trials, and one might think he's got something against NYC, and judging by his character, I can understand why.

Why Are We Tiring of Obama?by Victor Davis Hanson, December 11, 2009

The China Presidency

I have an heirloom china pitcher on my mantle that has dozens of glued cracks—so much so that it is now purely ornamental and will not hold water. When I was a boy I’d ask my mother when, and under what circumstances, did the china crack apart.

She would provide stories about each fissure and mend, many of the break narratives handed down to her from her own grandparents in the house. There wasn’t one single accident, but instead dozens that rendered a once useful pitcher into an non-functional art object.

Something of the same is happening with our President. He is experiencing the sharpest popularity decline in the history of first-year administrations. The problem is not just that he inherited a bad economy; Reagan did too. Or that the war in Afghanistan heats up, since it is not nearly as bad as the mess Nixon inherited in Vietnam.

Instead, after 11 months there has emerged a series of bothersome incidents that the public has come to associate with Obama, both the man and his philosophies. Some are major policy issues; others trivial acts of no cosmic importance. None in themselves matter all that much. Each gaffe or mistake was contextualized and mended, or attended to by Robert Gibbs. Some are Obama’s fault; others the work of associates. Sometimes mere chance is the culprit.

I know Bush had his own list of catastrophes; other Presidents did as well. Again, my point is not trying to adjudicate relative culpability, but rather just to remind us all how and why Obama dived over 20 points in the polls in just 11 months—and his speeches transformed from inspirational to caricatures.

In short, taken together, after nearly a year, these fissures have nearly ruined the once pretty texture of the Obama administration, and almost rendered it incapable of effective governance.

Here is a random selection. I provide no chronology or theme. Nor do I judge the relative importance of any one incident. The point, again, is only that each was a fissure, some small, some major—all were glued over. The result is that now the public understands that its china presidency is fragile and held together by mere glue.

Here it goes:

Constant apologies abroad for everything from slavery to Hiroshima

Bows to Saudi royalty, the Japanese emperor, and Chinese autocrats

The on-again/off-again Guantanamo shut-down mess

The fight with the former CIA directors

The public show trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed

The reach out to Ahmadinejad, Castro, Chavez, and assorted thugs

The Honduras fiasco

Czars everywhere

The serial “Bush did it”/reset whine abroad

The Queen of England/I-pod fiasco

Gordon Brown gets snookered in his gift-giving

Unceremoniously shipping back the Churchill bust

The end of the special relationship with the UK

The New York on-the-town presidential splurge

Anita Dunn and her Mao worship

Timothy Geithner/Tom Daschle/Hilda Solis and their taxes

What ever happened to Gov. Richardson?

“No lobbyists” = gads of them

The Podestas’ insider influence-peddling empire

Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” chauvinism

The Special Olympics silly quip

Trashing Nancy Reagan

The Skip Gates/police acting “stupidly” mess

The get-Chicago-the-Olympics jaunt to Copenhagen

Cap-and-trade boondoggle

“Millions of green jobs”

Ignore gas, oil, coal, and nuclear power production

Cash-for-clunkers

The Joe Biden gaffe machine

Jobs “saved” or “created” rather than references to the actual unemployment rates

Van Jones, the racist and truther

Desiree Rogers won’t testify

The blowback from, and silence about, the Rangel/Dodd corruption

The White House party crashers plan to take the 5th Amendment

The ‘bipartisanship’ con

The pork-barrel stimulus spoils

The demonization of the Town-Hallers

The Acorn Mess

The Kevin Jennings/Safe School Czar embarrassment

The SEIU direct access to the White House

The Asian Tour comedown

The politicization of the take-over of GM and Chrysler

The Obama readjustment in the order of paying back car creditors

Car dealerships closed on shaky criteria

Obama as “Caesar”

The Emanuel “never let a serious crisis go to waste” boast

The Black Caucus/Rangel/Waters bid to bail out the inner-city radio stations

Yosi Sergant and the NEA

$1.7 trillion deficit

The planned $9 trillion added to the national debt

New income tax rates; health care surcharge talk; and payroll tax caps to be lifted

Rahm Emanuel’s promised payback to those states that trash the stimulus

I listened to it this morning quite early and posted at NRO. Bottom line: an academic sermon on peace/war with the now accustomed Obama characteristics:

1) long again (4,000 words); 2) “I” or “me” 34 times: same old self referencing; 3) the inadvertent cosmic arrogance [“I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war.” = you think?]; 4) straw men trope: some say this; others say that; but I uniquely say…; 5) reference to my own personal inspirational story; 6) trash my predecessor or his policies; 7) end with hopey/changey cadences.

That was pretty much it—a pulpit exegesis that could have been cut to 500 words. I would have done the speech in 10 minutes and used the extra time to have lunch with poor neglected King Harald. (Second recommendation: Obama should try to hire some speech-writers over 40. There are a lot of old pro Democrat wordsmiths around that might come in and offer something new other than the now tired boilerplate.)

Some books…

As I mentioned a few posts ago, I’m rereading two great books on Belisarius—the 1828 classic by the then 24-year-old Lord Mahon (with a new intro by Jon Coulston), and a new biography by Ian Hughes. They read like Greek tragedies: Belisaurius is Justinian’s fireman, sent to stop Persians, Goths, Vandals, etc. always with too few troops, a plotting wife, court intrigue at his back, and a never satisfied emperor at home—apparently in some hope that Romanism could hold back the tide in the crumbling 6th century.

I am halfway through David Horowitz’s moving tribute to his late daughter Sarah (A Cracking of the Heart) that recounts their four-plus-decades relationship through turbulent politics, ill heath, and the often baffling past three decades in America. A sad, but fine reflection on life and the inevitably of change and death.

Saturday, December 12, 2009

If the mainstream media will not police the police, we are clearly living in dangerous times. It was shocking to realize my own son (who has three young beautiful children) had not heard the recent revelations about Obama's appointee, Safe School Czar Kevin Jennings.

If there is any justice, judging by the lack of subscriptions and audience, the mainstream media will be replaced by true investigative reporting, and this is the best example so far. What could be more important than protecting our young? This despicable man needs to be fired, and it is up to the 'new' media to take charge and follow this through. Nobody wants to write about this stuff, but our children's safety is at stake and it cannot be ignored -- passing out 'Gay Bar Guides"? Are you serious?

The new news media is the blogosphere with excellent reporting from the likes of Andrew Breitbart's BigGovernment et al, Michelle Malkin, HotAir, Ann Coulter, PajamasMedia, Erick Erickson's RedState, Gateway Pundit, and thousands of others. They have all been diligent in their reporting about Jennings, and in order to get Jennings away from our children, we must keep up the pressure.

Melissa Clouthier writes an excellent piece about this man in PajamasMedia:

Kevin Jennings: Teaching Your Kids to Live the Porn LifeThere are some lines that should not be crossed. Obama's "safe schools" czar needs to be fired.by Melissa Clouthier, December 12, 2009

If you get your news exclusively through the mainstream media, you don’t know Kevin Jennings. Of course, if you get your news exclusively through the mainstream media, you don’t read Pajamas Media. Even if you get your news through blogs, you still may have missed Kevin Jennings. It’s not easy to write about this man, even if you are informed.

Kevin Jennings, GLSEN’s founder, is recognized as a leader in both the education and civil rights communities and currently serves as the executive director of GLSEN, the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network.

Kevin Jennings also kept silent about a sexual relationship between a much older man and a former student, wants to segregate gay children in school, praised the NAMBLA founder, and taught in schools (with children) for years. There is much more.

Why has it taken me so long to write on this topic? Mostly because it’s rendered me speechless. I’ve been reading Jim Hoft’s amazing, breaking stories. The latest is that Republicans are calling, finally, for the firing of Jennings. But what’s to say? It’s horrifying.

This story makes Tipper Gore’s trilling against Eminem’s naughty words in music seem downright quaint. The leftists take warping youth to a whole new, deviant, depraved level.

What is to say?

This garbage is being taught in elementary and secondary schools to our kids. Do you get how heinous this is? In the protected environment of government-run schools a teacher can talk to a kid about fisting, but a television reporter would have to find a way to get around the FCC censors to report on it.

What. The. Hell.

So I’ve waited. Sat at my computer screen, stunned at what Jim was writing and not knowing what to do with it. Seems I’m not alone. In fact, Ed Morrissey, writing over at Hot Air, expresses the same feelings. He concludes (go read the whole thing):

Almost every parent wants their children to be well-informed on human biology and reproduction at the age of 14. They don’t want activists in their schools attempting to teach their 14-year-old children fetishistic techniques such as fisting, rimming, or watersports. Anyone who thinks that these topics are appropriate for 14-year-olds in the context of public education is someone who shouldn’t be within 500 yards of any school, let alone be the “safe schools” czar.

Twenty-five years ago, Monty Python’s Meaning of Life satirized parental fears over sex education in schools with a hilarious segment in which the teacher actually demonstrates sexual techniques with his wife to a room full of bored and distracted teenage boys. The hilarity of this skit relies on the ridiculous notion that anyone would ever dream of doing something this inappropriate in a school. Unfortunately, in this case, life has trumped satire — and now we call it the Obama administration. This clip is NSFW, but so is this whole thread.

There are pictures of the literature handed out at Ed’s post. You’ll read safer content at hardcore porn sites.

What this amounts to is what I’ve called the “pornification of the culture” — where nothing is off-limits and the age of consent is dialed down. At Gateway Pundit, Jim reports that teachers had materials that glorify incest, molestation, and more.

You know what this also reminds me of? How feminists frame abortion. You know, abortions aren’t harmful. Those are just clumps of tissue. You won’t feel bad afterward. But it’s a rare woman who doesn’t feel bad afterward. Women are told a lie over and over and it becomes the truth. I feel bad after this abortion, but I was told I shouldn’t feel bad. What’s wrong with me?

So the freaks who want to have easy access to children try to institutionally desensitize them to abuse. That’s what child predators do. They “groom” children so that when they cross the boundary into sexual abuse, it isn’t really abuse; it’s another “choice.” And if the child feels badly, well, it’s because the child has been enculturated by a puritanical society. The solution is to sexualize children from the moment they can walk and talk. Probably earlier.

A pox on these freaks houses. Their efforts rob children of childhood and destroy the innocence in sexual discovery. It is an abomination. There is not a teenager alive who hasn’t figured out what parts go where. Why is sexual education even necessary? But it’s not about sexual education. It’s about justifying their own base behavior and the warped childhood experiences that brought them to their current state. To remove their own shame, they wish to shame everyone. They wish to rip natural coming-of-age experiences to threads and make it a profane thing.

This is not to romanticize youth or the teenage years. Kids these days are exposed to images and ideas people even twenty years before didn’t experience. Still, there is no reason for the public schools to participate and encourage this corruption.

Kevin Jennings should be fired. The writers and and promoters of this garbage should be run out of town. Seriously. There are some lines that should not be crossed. Protection from such exposure should be a bare minimum for a “school safety” czar, don’t you think?

Friday, December 11, 2009

Is this any way to run a household budget? Common sense tells you, when your expenses exceed your income, something has to give. Responsible adults review the cash flow and make adjustments by cutting back their expenses. If not, they are looking bankruptcy square in the face. If this administration keeps going along their chosen path, America will clearly go bankrupt, and one has to wonder if this in their intended outcome.

If we are to save this country, we must stay engaged, we must continue to educate ourselves, and we must band together to speak out in protest of this 'transformation' of the United States of America. Just add up the new bills recapped in this piece. Unbelievable!

More proof is written in the Heritage Foundation, as Miss Nancy (clearly addicted to power) presses for more money, and raising the debt ceiling to roughly $14 TRILLION dollars. Again, our individual household budget would drive us to bankruptcy if our credit card companies did not cut us off, but rather increase our credit line. Complete and total suicide.

Speaker Pelosi’s SpendapaloozaDecember 11, 2009

Next week Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) is expected to attach a provision to the Department of Defense appropriations bill that would increase our national debt limit by $1.925 trillion. This debt limit raise would authorize the U.S. Treasury to borrow as much as $14 trillion, which is 30% higher than the $10.8 trillion limit that was in place when President Barack Obama took office.

Defending the unprecedented size of the debt limit, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) told The Examiner: “There is no doubt the debt ceiling will have to be at that level in order to meet our financial obligations at this time next year. This is not creating new debt.” Not creating new debt? Hoyer speaks as though he and his Speaker are completely powerless to control all the federal spending that is driving up “our financial obligations.” In fact, Hoyer’s statement comes on the same day that he and Speaker Pelosi forced through a $447 billion “minibus” spending bill that every single Republican and 28 Democrats voted against.

It is far past time for responsible leaders in Congress to rein in Pelosi’s profligacy. At a bare minimum, lawmakers should demand that any debt-limit increase also statutorily cap discretionary spending growth at the inflation rate (approximately 2.5 percent annually) for the next decade. Even better, a return to federal spending levels of just a decade ago could go a long way towards solving our debt problem. Heritage’s Brian Riedl explains:

In the 1980s and 1990s, Washington consistently spent $21,000 per household (adjusted for inflation). Simply returning to that level would balance the budget by 2012 without any tax hikes. Alternatively, returning to the $25,000 per household level (adjusted for inflation) that Washington spent before the current recession would likely balance the budget by 2019 without any tax hikes.

According to a USA TODAY analysis, while the private sector has shed 7.3 million jobs, the number of federal government workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession.

According to The New York Times, Americans who buy the same health benefits as members of Congress, or buy coverage through Medicare, will have to fork over a large chunk of cash under the latest Senate Democrat health plan.

The Washington Examiner reports that only one fourth of AARP revenues come from membership dues, while the rest come from selling AARP’s name to businesses, including businesses that would benefit from Obamacare, which the AARP has endorsed.

According to a new report, climate change criminals have pocketed almost 5 billion Euros by manipulating Europe’s carbon trading “market.”